2013-02-11
2013-02-19
x iran

STATION
CSPAN2 12
CSPAN 9
MSNBCW 9
KQED (PBS) 5
FBC 4
KRCB (PBS) 3
CNN 2
CNNW 2
KCSM (PBS) 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
LINKTV 1
MSNBC 1
LANGUAGE
English 56

Set Clip Length:


chief architects of american foreign policy. the leadership lecture series was established by ambassador xu cobb to commemorate her husband, chuck birthday. please join me in recognizing sue and chuck for 25 years of providing the university of miami community with the opportunity to host insightful and a provocative leaders from all walks of life. [applause] >> i also want the students to thank them for generously donating 300 secretary rice's very big books which were given to the first 300 students who attended this year's event. [applause] >> the university takes no credit for doing this. i want to thank our very good friend of the books and books, the university met with him recently to discuss launching a new partnership to bring speakers to the campus and one week later he called to say we are going to have an opportunity to host the secretaries first public tour event. i think this is the beginning of a beautiful relationship. thank you very much. [applause] >> now they have sponsored other distinguished speakers, the founder ross perot, the commissioner david stern, david gergen

policy front, some of the best foreign policy reporters in the business. david ignatius is with the "washington post," of course. tom ricks used to work for the "poat" is now contributing editor to "foreign policy" magazine and margaret brennan is our cbs news state department correspondent. before we get to foreign subjects here on earth, i want to talk about matters from outer space, and that meteorite that fell over siberia and injured over 1,000 people. so we're going back to new york to talk with the science editor and senior editor of "time" magazine jeffrey chewinger. jeffrey, let me start with the obvious. this thing caught our attention. there's no question about that. should we be worried about this? do these things pose a danger to those of us here on earth? >> well, they do and they don't. there's some comfort to be takenarchs we report in "time" magazine this week, that the earth has been playing in traffic for about 4 billion years now especially the time calmed the heavy bombardment period when the solar system hadn't quite acreeded yet. even today, every

again during his time in office. >> presidents also touched on foreign policy, praising u.s. soldiers stationed in afghanistan and promising them a speedy return home. >> the president of the united states. [applause] >> it is a washington ritual, long applause, handshakes, and hugs on both sides of the aisle. in his speech, obama focused clearly on domestic issues, among them, raising the minimum wage, reforming immigration, and modernizing the education system. he also address america's political third rail -- gun control. the president promised survivors of gun control violence he would pursue common-sense reform. in a short foreign policy segment of his speech, obama said that efforts were on the course to conclude afghan operations next year. turning to europe, he raised the prospect of a free-trade zone to encourage commerce with european union countries and believe fears his new asian focus would come at europe's expense -- the late -- belay fears. >> trade that is fair and free across the atlantic supports millions of good-paying american jobs. >> but in a bitterly divided was

from the president last night. i didn't hear a new initiative in foreign policy. i didn't hear a new initiative on domestic policy. i heard 20-some odd programs that won't cost a dime, sounded like a candy rock mountain to me, which i learned does not exist. were you surprised? >> that was a new proposal at least, but i'm not surprised or disappointed. i think -- lou: i love a happy american. >> he's doubling down on a liberal agenda should not be a surprise to anybody, especially you, lou. lou: well, i maintain my unanimity, objectivity, and, always, my hope, of course. we're going to change the subject very quickly. we're going to come back to why is the president, why did he decide to make israel -- interesting, the first trip, first foreign trip of his second term? the a-team has some skeptical outlook, i would say, critical judgments they apply on these things, well, judy does on foreign policy,nyway, not necessarily the minimum wage. back with the a-team in moments. stay with us. lou: back with the a-team, and i do want to turn, first, to the response. senator rubio, as i point

information about what the white house did during the benghazi attack. he told "foreign policy magazine," quote, we need to know what the president's conversations were. i would vote no on thursday to disclosure unless the information is provide. by tuesday, or almost every day of the week, he said the president has responded to his satisfaction. but he didn't vote for closure. here's his latest. watch. >> there are still questions outstanding. i believe that senators have the right to have those questions answered. the senators and i had questions today. but there are other questions. >> like can you give us a copy of every speech you every gave krks you give us a dollar-for-dollar assessment for every dollar you made? by ta way, if you don't, we're going to accuse you. and joy, by the way, you're younger than i am by many, many years. we went back and looked at the innuendo. i don't know what he's running for. people say attorney general. i don't know why he's -- >> yeah, he's not running for president because i think he was born in canada. you said earlier in your introduce, chris, t

back to the election" rather than the point of view he has about foreign policy. >> we don't agree on very much in terms of foreign policy. when i think about the national security team that led to my comment that i thought the president was making second-rate choices, that goes to things like hagel for defense, susan rice to state, brennan for c.i.a.. >> brennan worked closely, was in the c.i.a. >> john was around when we were there. he didn't play a prominent role. that's really developed since he joined this administration. >> rose: but there are -- >> but there are people that could be appoint as director of c.i.a. folks like steve cap pass. i don't know if you know him? >> rose: i know him very well. >> talented guy, enormously respected. >> rose: retired from the c.i.a.. >> he has retired. they brought him back once before, we did. with people of that caliber available, i'm surprised you end up going with somebody like brennan. i just -- i come back to the proposition that it looks to me-- and speculative on my part, obviously, i'm not in the meetings-- that the president has

of this committee strongly opposed president obama's foreign-policy. regardless of how we may feel about the president's policies, or float on senator hagel nomination will not change those policies. there is a risk here it is that the defeat of this domination will leave the department of defense leaderless at a time when we face in this budgetary challenges in our military is engaged in combat operations overseas. such an absence of senior leaders would be unlikely to benefit either our national defense or men and away uniform, and i would add, given the recent explosion of a nuclear device by north korea, the delay in adopting this nomination and approving it, i think, will send the exact wrong message to north korea. the president needs to have a secretary of defense in him he has stressed who will give him unvarnished advice, a person of integrity and one who has a personal understanding of the consequences of decisions relative to the use of military force. senator hagel certainly has those critically important qualifications, and he is well qualified to lead department of defense.

touched on various foreign- policy issues from afghanistan to iran and north korea. it was america's faltering economy that topped the agenda. now this report. >> the president of the united states. [cheers and applause] >> every year the president gets one chance to use the pageantry and prestige of his office to lay out his agenda. as he begins his second term, president barack obama coloma to describe a progressive wish list, calling for a higher minimum wage, preschool reform, immigration reform, climate change, and investment in the economy to create jobs. >> it is our task to make sure this government works on behalf of the many and not just the few, that it encourages free enterprise, rewards individual initiative, and opens the doors of opportunity to every child across this great nation. [applause] >> in response to his economic message, republicans say higher taxes on the wealthy will not help. >> the tax increases and deficit spending will hurt middle-class families. it will cost them their raises. it will cost them their benefits and may cost them their jobs. >> on fore

in. obama unfortunately comes in with very little background on foreign policy never paid much attention, is served in washington only two years i was enthusiastic supporter but those of us that looked at him knew it could be a problem and when he appointed secretary of state and secretary of defense for domestic reasons and appointed retired marine general as a national security adviser and put leon panetta, know he is a neighbor in california but captured by the mentality of the cia this was an extremely weak national security team and obama also was ruled by the military that is how you got the search of forces and i think he realizes he was had and that is important why i am a little more optimistic with the second turn this is a wiser man and with the the fact he ended the war in iraq and meandering toward the war in afghanistan allowing the of pentagon, an institution of the fine motor skills of a dinosaur takes them a long time to put something together for withdrawal. all obama has to do is look at gorbachev. he came 1985, a secret speech 1986 denouncing afghanistan, he

house did during the benghazi attack. he told "foreign policy" magazine, quote, we need to know what the president's conversations were. i would vote no on cloture on thursday unless the information is provided. by tuesday -- actually by yesterday, which almost every day of the week he's changed his mind, the white house had responded to his satisfaction, but he still didn't vote for cloture. he still wouldn't vote to bring this matter of hagel's confirmation up to a vote, and here is his latest. let's watch. >> there are still questions outstanding. i believe that senators have the right to have those questions answered. the senator from south carolina and the senator from new hampshire and i had a response from the president today on the question that we had, but there are other questions. >> like can you give us a copy of every speech you ever gave? can you give us a dollar-for-dollar assessment of every dollar you ever made? by the way, if you don't tell us, we're going to accuse you of getting money from the north koreans. that's the way we will pay you. joy, you're younger than

support from senior statesman, defense and foreign policy organizations and the jittery 31 hearing he was endorsed enthusiastically by to former chairman of the committee the senators on the mission has been endorsed by five former secretary of defense who served under democratic and republican presidents, gates , a calling, perry, a brown and ugly year and endorsed by three former secretaries of state of six former national security advisers. receive letters of undress and from nine former ambassadors who worked on middle east issues and 11 and retired officers and 50 embassadors in national security officials. supported by the major groups of american veterans including iraq and afghanistan veterans of america, of vfw, a vietnam vets of america, and that an american legion and receive support from the military officers association of america, and the noncommissioned officers it is underscored by "war and peace" and i believe he enlisted in at army and received two purple hearts for the combat infantry badge. he served as deputy administrator during the reagan ministration and was tw

. they were two managements of foreign policy. one low level, and a different one strategic going out of the white house, and many thinks the white house had at the time objectives not really informed at the security council on the one hand or the state department. lou: let me ask you just straight up, yes or no. were you disappointed or disgusted at the conduct of the president of the united states and the secretary of state? >> i think that by trying to put this on the video, this was a diversion from what was happening on the ground, and they tried not to inform the american public before the elections. i think that's the con consensuf most of us, those of us who know what the jihadists were trying to do. lou: thank you for being with us. more on the rising tensionings in -- tensions in the middle east and president obama's response with the a-team next. the northeast hit by another big storm. in fact, a record storm. the blizzard update is next. bush whacked or hacked, however you want to say it, the bush family photos and secret e-mails of the former first family released on the

foreign policy magazine, quote, we need to know what the president's conversations were. i would vote no on cloture on thursday unless the information is provided. by tuesday, actually by yesterday, almost every day of the week he's changed his mind, the white house responded to his satisfaction but still didn't vote for cloture. still wouldn't bring this matter up to a vote. here's his latest. let's watch. >> there are still questions outstanding. i believe that senators have the right to have those questions answered. senator from south carolina and senator from new hampshire had a response from the president today on the question that we had. but there are other questions. >> like can you give us a copy of every speech you ever gave? give us a dollar for dollar assessment of every dollar you ever made. if you don't tell us we're going to accuse you of getting money from the north koreans. joy, you're younger than me, i think, by a lot of years and i have it to tell you, this does -- we're going to get to this. i'm going to sell this second segment coming up. we went back and looked

. john, what do you think? >> he will talk about foreign policy. forbes policy will not be the thrust of the speech. jobs, the economy will be. but when he talks about foreign policy, it's a pretty safe bet north korea will be on his mind. the president set to give that address at 9:00 eastern time. reports indicate that he may do a little bit more finger pointing this time than reaching across the aisle. congressman adam kinzinger, a republican from ill. thank you for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> we're getting previews about how the president may sound tonig, glen thrush of politico says don't expect anything like the call for peaceful collaboration that addressed the joint congress in 2009. >> month of the same. i think this is an opportunity. the president has an amazing opportunity to call republicans and democrats together to say both sides have to accept things they don't want in order to accept the problems in the country and for future generations. that's what's missing, the discussion of what happens next with the next generation of americans and, unfortunately,

talk about foreign policy, it's a direct impact on the department of defense and these are exact questions we should be asking. >> heather: and this is not unprecedented. there are two other times that a cabinet secretary needed 60 votes and both of those bush nominees facing harry reid and democrats and environmental agency head. both had to meet 60 vote threshold. now it has happened to hagel. the third time in ten years. so it's not unprecedented. my question to you, why rush it? >> because the department of defense is responsible for our military. we are currently in conflict right now. i think this is something that has to deal with national security. you really need to get serious and get to work here. we can't be talking about things that are not relevant. they are asking for information about benghazi and chuck hagel had nothing to do with benghazi. if you wanted questions about that you need to talk on other people. >> heather: they got one of those questions answered, that is whether or not president obama himself personally called libyan officials on the night of septe

've covered foreign policy in washington for a long time. can you put this into some kind of perspective, historically? how rare is it for this to happen to a president's nominee? >> well, this is very rare. i mean, it's unprecedented. i covered the john tower nomination. he was the former chairman of the committee of the armed services committee. and that was also something that john mccain brought up yesterday. that's part of the grudge match. he wasn't filibustered because the administration just lost that one. but this filibuster with a recess permits the opposition to keep upping the ante. i mean, one of the things that you and joe are pointing out here is that every time chuck hagel turns a corner, they're flowing something else up there. benghazi wasn't even on his watch. they used it to try to get leverage. to try to get more information about what the president did on that night. did he go to bed? was he calling the pentagon? who was in charge? something that they could have asked in another context. they did get a letter from the white house lawyer yesterday which responded at

and patriotism and service. my focus is entirely on his long-standing foreign policy record, and his opposition to sanctions to any form of direct action dealing with those who would cause harm. and so in no way, shape, or form have i impugned his pages is the i focus on his foreign policy record which even the "washington post" describes as the french. cycling the senator from florida suggested that i stated that mr. hagel has not been truthful. to the contrary, my point is exactly the opposite. that the question this committee asked whether he has director received money from foreign sources enables him to answer that truthfully, no, while at the same time not disclosing whether the hundreds of thousands of dollars he has received has come indirectly from foreign sources. his answers could be entirely truthful and yet the example i use of course, that money, that 200,000 could have come from a foreign nation, and he could answer that truthfully, no, i haven't received it but it came from an intermediary. and my point is not that he has lied. it is rather that he has refused to answer reasonab

, she was talking about war, i don't think we will hear a lot about foreign policy tonight. we will hear about the president trying to and pull troops out of afghanistan. and we will probably hear about north korea, since that happened today. that might change things a little. by peter will be a good number of things that he will not mention, which is interesting. guest: i have never observed a pattern of wars beginning in conjunction with state of the union addresses. one thing i will watch for this evening is the congressional black caucus, a collection of black members of congress, met recently with valerie jarrett on the hill. she's one of the president's top advisers, to discuss the state of the union to some extent. the question i have is whether he is going to address black unemployment specifically and things that will help bring that number down. i think that is what the congressional black caucus wants, but i don't know if that is when he's going to do. host: host: kumar worked in florida and washington. jonathan strong has some experience at "roll call." here reported on envir

, manufacturing, immigration. he talked about foreign policy issues as well. here's the new york times with a little history about the state of the union addresses. ronald in kentucky, independent. what are your thoughts on the state of the union? caller: i liked what he set about raising the minimum wage and immigration reform and some of the others things. i am a little frustrated with congress and why they cannot get their act together and work together to get things done. host: what would you like to see them get done? caller: i would like to see them get things done, not taking so long to get the budget under control. instead of all this talk about cutting benefits, cutting things there. i never heard nobody mentioned nothing about so much money the u.s. is sending overseas to these other countries. out others, helping doing my part. but before you start cutting people that have worked all their lives to support the united states, start looking overseas and seeing where you are sending the money. host: budget experts have said the foreign aid makes up less than -- it's not even do

of foreign policy, and if you look at the fact that he has ended in the war in iraq, he has meandering towards ending the war in afghanistan, he's allowing the pentagon, and you've got to remember when you look at the pentagon, you're looking at an institution that has the fine motor skills of a dinosaur. it takes the pentagon a long time to put together a timetable such as for withdraw. all obama has to do, and i know it's not this simple, but i would look at the experience, came in in 1995, gave the speech in 1996, announcing the bleeding wound, he had nazis tell schulz we were getting out and the military had a year to turn it around, and they wouldn't be able to. 88, they announced the timetable, 89 they were gone. we need to do something similar. military's had its chances. we had 11 commanders in afghanistan in 11 years. look at thomas rick's book "the generals" that devotes a lot of attention to this. that's not a war where we can be successful. it's not the kind of military we have. there's no military that's ever been successful in a counter insurgency, and not only do they ha

and foreign policy organizations. at his january 31 nomination hearing, before the armed services committee, senator hagel was enthusiastically introduced and endorsed by two former chairmen of our committee, chairmen who have huge bipartisan support and respect by everybody in this body and everybody outside of this body who knows them, and those two chairmen are sam nunn and john warner. senator hagel's nomination has been endorsed by five former secretaries of defense who served under both democratic and republican presidents, bob gates, bill cohen, bill perry, harold brown and melvin leery. he has been endorsed by three former secretaries of state, madeleine albright, colin powell and george shultz, and by six former national security advisors who served in that position for more than 20 years under six of the last seven presidents. let me just share with our colleagues a few of the words of senator nunn when he introduced senator hagel to our committee. senator nunn said that i believe that our nation is fortunate to have a nominee for secretary of defense with the character, the exper

further reference as well. hosting where the debate is doctor bucci, director of our center for foreign policy studies. he previously served heritage a senior research fellow for defense and homeland security. is well-versed in the special area operations and cybersecurity areas as well as defense support to civil authorities. he served for three decades as an army special forces officer in july 2001 coming assume the duties of military assistance to secretary rumsfeld and worked daily with the secretary for the next five and a half years, and then upon retirement from the army continued at the pentagon is deputy assistant secretary of defense, homeland defense, and america security affairs but please join me in welcoming steve bucci. [applause] >> let me add my welcome to all of you. i think you're going to have a real treat this morning, as john mentioned him on a special forces officer by profession, and so this area is near and dear to my heart. this is kind of what we do. they don't let me do it anymore. i mentioned to max when he came in a little historical artifact, and that when

're going to do that unless there is a political or a foreign policy reason for them not to do it. >> i mean there's been the questions about responding to sanctions. i mean even today people are wondering, is it tied to state of the union. is it sort of a direct, you know, push against the u.s.? >> i don't think so. i mean, in 2009 we heard this exact same thing. it was a condemnation of their april 2009 missile launch. the north koreans six weeks later conducted a second nuclear test in which they said it was because of the condemnation that occurred over their missile tests. you know, the response to that is that's nonsense. nobody conducts nuclear tests because they've been chastised over a missile test. more specifically, i would say if you're looking at a concurrence of time, it's not the state of the union. it's the two weeks prior to the inauguration of a new south korean president. >> brown: to another part of the world. we'll get back to that. let me ask james acton, the north korean official news agency referred to this as a miniaturized and lighter nuclear device with greater exp

. >> were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? were you correct or incorrect, yes or no? >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no answer on a lot >> warner: on sunday, republican senator lindsey graham said he would put a hold on hagel and on john brennas nonati as c.i.a. director, until he gets more answers from the white house about the september attack in benghazi, libya. in a statement today, white house spokesman josh earnest reaffirmed president obama's support for hagel. and said: late today, reid forced a vote on breaking the fillibuster. the current defense secretary leon panetta who'd been due to leave his post today has said he will stay on until his successor is confirmed. and, at a ceremony honoring for and late today the president said it was unfortunate to have politics intrude while he's still presiding over a war in afghanistan. to help us understand the implications, the politics and what's next, we turn to pentagon reporter mark thompson of "time" magazine. and todd z

are republicans trying to subvert the foreign policy of the united states over an old and bitter grudge? let's bring in ari melber and democrat strategist julian ep sto epstein. what is senator mccain's problem? is he trying to defend a mode okur president bush or is he trying to defend a failed war in iraq? >> i think it's more iraq where we know senator mccain has long stood by our presence there and adding troops there, but bottom line if you take this as the mccain filibuster standard, then no one in any democratic administration ever gets a vote because, guess what? a lot of them have good faith and i think well-grounded disagreements with george w. bush. so this cannot be the standard. it's not defensible on its own terms and that's the problem. they are erecting a supermajority hurdle for all of this legislation and all of these nominees. this is an old problem from the way the republicans have been acting and it doesn't stand up because by this standard again you would not let anyone serve in government that you di agreed with. >> but it's based on a grudge. it's based on a bitter gr

was a lovely president. him.ve host: what did you think of ronald reagan's foreign policy? caller: he had a good foreign policy. the increased our navy, our air force. that's how he defeated the soviet union. nobody ever did that. host: june 12, 1987, ronald reagan, in a speech to the people of west berlin about communism. [video clip] >> we welcome change and openness, but we believe freedom and security go together, that the in advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. there's one sign the soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance drastically the cause of freedom and peace. general secretary gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the soviet union, come to this gate. mr. gorbachev, open this gate. [cheers and applause] mr. gorbachev, tear down this wall. host: president ronald reagan. we have done a lot on the american presidents, house, and even those who did not make it to the presidency with our series "the contenders" last year. go to the archives are our website, the video library at c- span.org. if you're interest

will be back home by this time yex neanext year. it is a big foreign policy to be made, it's expected to be largely about economic issues and the middle class. >> what do you think, is it going to be partisan or more of an olive branch? >> i don't think it will be either, if i can be so bold as to take something that you're not offering a choice that you're not offering. >> you may take it as always. >> i think he will be assertive. i think he will not perceive, he and the white house will not perceive what he's saying as overtly confrontational. i'm sure it will be interpreted that way. i don't anticipate a big olive branch of a speech. he'll talk about common sense measures republicans have supported in the past and stlu as bipartisan. >> the agenda on immigration, gun control, climate by definition, pre-stage conflict with republicans who are ambivalent at best about moving forward on anything. on the other hand, on the big issue of the debt and deficit, since the summer of 2011 he has signaled that he is willing to make a big deal, including some elements, maybe less than two year

business is our business. adt. always there. jenna: welcome back, everyone. it's a foreign policy flashback if you will with new concerns today over iran and north korea, two countries singled out by president george w. bush nor than a decade ago during his state of the union address. remember this? >> north korea has a regime arming with missiles and weapons of mass destruction while starving its citizens. iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror while an unelected few reexpress the iranian's people's' hope for freedom. iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward america and support terror. states like these and these terrorist allies constitute an axis of evil arming to threaten the peace of the world. jenna: well two charter members of the axis of evil iran and north korea both in the spotlight at this year's state of the union. take a listen. >> our challenges don't end with al-qaida. america will continue to lead the effort to prevent the spread of the world's most dangerous weapons. the regime in north korea must know they will only achieve security and prosperity

of the israeli foreign ministry and that he thinks israel has an undue influence on the foreign policy. hagel said i never said and i do i want believe it we'll see. to graham is that enough. he said let's make sure it is true. if it turned out it is not true and he could be in serious trouble and they want more information. if i had to beat, i beat more chance than not he will get through. but in the panel, we talked to bob woodword and he said some democratics are uneasy with the hagel nomination and in this week, he compared to water gate twist negligent wind that maybe democratics may go to the white house and pressure them to drop hagel, we'll see. >> there are two tracts, objection toz hagel himself and record in the past and using it as leverage to git more've - get more information about bengazi. you think bengazi is it answered it would help approximate hagel to sail through or the delay in time will bring up more time to dig up more things about him? >> state your namely some people who oppose hagel and try to dig up more information on him. failing that even if they don't get the a

was dismissive, on climate change, which was dismissive. i think there were two sentences on foreign policy. i think you have to say more about the position of the united states and the world. >> the middle east is in flames right now. you should probably talk about it. >> you have to be self-aware. and i think of chris christie, who i believe, unless i remember incorrectly, turned it down. >> he's a smart man, chris christie, and he's in the 70s. >> he turned this one down? >> not this one. >> i have a question that perhaps john heilemann can answer. marco rubio's a smart guy, an attractive guy, an articulate guy with a terrific life story. why is it that in an age in the past few months when the republicans have been talking about broadening the base of the party, speaking to a larger audience, why is it that he spent so much time last night seemingly preaching to the choir rather than talking to the country? >> that's a good point. >> well, you know, mike, i think he points out the awkward intraparty politics that the republicans now face. you know, you have a party that does need to broade

chuck, like his foreign policy. he's a realist, not a neo con and he turned in one of the worst performances on capitol hill. i will be the first to admit it. could have been better said the washington redskins when they lost 73-0. could have been better and i think chuck will be the first to admit that. are you going to support him? >> yes, i am. >> why? >> he's real. really real. he's been through war, been on the front line and been wounded. i asked him is there anything you can give me to doubt you wouldn't do anything to defend this country and america. >> you're talking about iran and -- >> i'm talking everything. he gave me a very satisfactory answer. his actions of spoken for that. also on israel. we were concerned about israel and iran. he gave two very strong answers on that. i have no doubt he would do everything he can to protect our country and fight for it and draw basically strong with our allies with israel. i feel comfortable with him and i hope he would be confirmed. >> you think he will be? >> i think he will be. i think at the end of the day. you know what, t

on losing that war, what he said was most dangerous foreign policy blunder since vietnam. it's obvious now that statement was history locally unemployed, uninformed and on surd. for the satisfaction i told you so moment but to determine if secretary hagel, senator hagel recognized he was inner roar. and more importantly if that recognition informs the judgment today. i want to know if he learned from the mistakes. unfortunately i'm not confident he has. after two weeks of reviewing his record, my concerns about whether senator hague is ready to serve of secretary of deafen is not diminished. nothing in his background candidates that he would effectively manage the department of defense. in today's unprecedented environment fiscal uncertainty. ensuring that defense investment decisions effect ang agency is massive and unwielding as the department of deference proven frack record of successfully managerring large connell pletion organization. he has no experience. there are those who seek to cut waste fraud and abuse. senator hagel seeks something else entirely. to cut military capability an

effective approach to foreign policy. so i am enormously proud of what we have achieved and i'm confident about the future having left the state department in capable hands of secretary john kerry, himself an accomplished diplomat decorated navy veteran. so i believe we have established a strong base for this kind of collaboration, which i think is essential and going forward against the challenges and threats that we face. i have been of growing up in a navy household. during world war ii, my father is a chief petty up sir, training soldiers before they were picked up to the pacific. he sits on my brothers and me how i felt watching this young man get loaded knowing that many would never return home. after he died, many years later, i received an outpouring of letters and photographs are men he trained, who is served and returned home in the lives and families of their own. i just couldn't believe that experience, being yelled at them i thought there so four-minute for a time when i was glad to hear it, frankly. i saw this same sense of dedication and duty when i first lady and senator f

more. foreign policy, it is 51% to 37%. theresa, nevada. caller: regarding president obama using executive orders to go around the republicans in the house, i am all for it. i am aware that this is a two- party democracy and we need republicans to be reasonable working party, but they have not been. the president has no choice but to go around them. john boehner has walked away. i am frustrated and the country is frustrated, other democrats are frustrated and scared. i am scared of the things they're willing to do to our country. he is doing what he has to do. i am all for his proposals, all for clean energy and comprehensive immigration, i am for gun legislation. i am for all of them. i am center-left, that is progressive. i think the country is definitely going progressive. i do not understand where the republicans want to obstruct and go with their small mindedness and small government proposals that they think that they can push through on the american people that i do not think are very popular. host: we have a different opinion from twitter. host: david wright's in on twitt

the american foreign policy was conducted in the middle east and i don't think they indicate some kind of unsuitability to be secretary of defense. i think he would have been is wiser to state it as he did on other occasions saying he could have good relations with israel and at the same time good relations with other countries but stay true and look out for america's interests first. >> reporter: ajyan blogged about the comments at the time but despite he supports hagel's nomination. bill: what is the reaction we're getting on capitol hill? >> reporter: senator lindsey graham opposes hagel's nomination. he heard about the comments and wrote a letter to hagel on "fox news sunday" yesterday. hagel responded but he does not remember making the remarks but he now disavows them. gram has concerns about that and other comments. >> if the second statement were true he said that the secretary of state's office under the control of israeli foreign ministers. those two together would show an edge and view of the israeli-u.s. relationship way out of the mainstream. >> reporter: graham said he wi

" focusing on foreign policies issues ahead on capitol hill. host: and now on your screen is representative elliot engel, democrat of new york and in the 113th congress the ranking member, the top democrat on the foreign affairs committee. representative engel, as always, we appreciate you being on the "washington journal." from that perch in the foreign affairs committee, what's your -- what are some of your issues this year that you'd like to confront? guest: well, obviously the president spoke at the state of the union the other night, talked about winding down the war in afghanistan finally and removing american troops. when the troops are actually all removed, still negotiations between us and the afghanis about what american presence will be afterwards. but that's, i think, something that the american people are tired of and happy to see winding down. we also, of course, have the volatile middle east, where we have the arab spring and egypt and syria, of course, in the throes of a civil war. assad brutally killing his own people. clearly he's going to go. the question is who comes in

in iraq, the decision to help prevent our losing that war when he said was the most dangerous foreign policy blunder since vietnam. it's quite obvious now that that statement was his tree i don't know nick, woe -- was histrionic, woefully uninformed and absurd. i didn't raise it at senator hagel's hearing for an i told you so moment but to determine he if senator hagel recognizes he was in error. and more importantly, if that recognition informs his judgment today. i wanted to know if he had learned from his mistakes. unfortunately, i'm not confident that he has. after two weeks of reviewing his record, my concerns about whether senator hagel is ready to serve as secretary of defense have not diminished. nothing in senator hagel's background indicates that he would effectively manage the department of defense. in today's unprecedented environment of fiscal uncertainty, ensuring that defense investment decisions affecting an agency as massive and unwieldy as the department of defense do not adversely impact our military readiness is enormously challenging. it requires that the secretar

. a policy on capping municipal bonds at 20%, i'm curious whether you will continue that policy? on the foreign investments in the real estate ask, whether you think the treasury department will complete that irs notice and take action, that would help jumpstart by the investments. >> administration's proposal would have eliminated the value of the talk -- top tax bracket of the 20%. -- 20%. -- 28%. it is not directed at municipal bonds or specific areas of tax activity. it is meant to be a placeholder that we should have tax reform. we need to make specific policies deciding what is in and what is out and what the property tax rate are. we put in the fall back saying that a taxi from does not happen, this is something that would help us get to the target that we need. i would happy -- i would be happy to follow up with you on these issues. the general proposition -- the hard decisions and tax reform will in many cases where there are many things that we are sympathetic to, but we have to curtail tax benefits to broaden the base. it is a general rule that there were a lot of --

certainly want better trade policies. i want more support and subsidies for american manufacturers rather than for foreign manufacturers but you can make sure the federal government is being a good steward of taxpayer dollars and using them to buy for from americans rather than foreign companies. host: 1 last tweet -- guest: you will never stop everyone from buying an illegal gun. that is always the case with laws we pass. if you want laws the one that% air tight, we should not pass anything. we're trying to cut down on the number of illegal sales oe

the jewish lobby, saying the iranian regime is legitimate, talking about sanctions, saying that the policy is containment when it's not, it's prevention. in rutgers, he apparently had a statement that claimed he accused the state department of doing the ordering and the bidding of the israeli foreign ministry. because you have this delay, could more come out? could this snowball within the next week and a half that he could be pulled? >> well, i don't know about you, eric, but i rarely seen a cabinet secretary, cabinet appointee under the microscope the way this guy has. and i hope you'll pardon me, but short of finding out that he had improper relations with somebody under the age of 16 or so, i think everybody knows what's out there. people have made up their minds. you saw it in the votes. and i do think he will be confirmed. it's just, i don't know. i understand john mccain making a point. he also said that chuck hagel was friend of his and i thought, boy, with friends like that. but i think if you're outside of washington, you have to say, what are these guys and girls doing? we're go

will continue that policy and also on the foreign investment and real-estate act whether you'd think the treasury department is guard to complete that irs notice and take actions that would help jump-start private investment. >> senator, the administration's proposal which would have limited the value of the top tax bracket to 28% was designed to try and restore some equity in the tax code and to generate revenue that we need for mira fiscal targets. it was not specifically directed at municipal bonds or other specific areas such activity. it was also meant to be a place holder, that we really should have tax reform and we should make specific policies deciding what is in and what is out of what the proper tax rates are. we put it as a fallback saying that if tax reform does not happen, this is something that would help us get to the revenue targets that we need. i would be happy to follow up with you on these issues of the individual component parts of tax reform, but i would say as a general proposition that the hard decision in tax reform will come in many cases, but as in places

on capitol hill blasting the obama administration, the chairman of the house foreign affairs committee, republican ed royce, is calling on the administration to replace what he calls a failed north korea policy. chief white house or correspondent ed henry is live on the north lawn. ed, do we expect the president to mention this north korea mess in his state of the union speech tonight? and if so, if i may, how does it fit into his agenda? >> reporter: sure, arthel. bottom line is the president's aides say he is likely to mention this essentially failed test by the north koreans tonight. they are deeply concerned here at the white house, though, that know keeps doing these tests. as you say, the president put out a written statement calling this provocative, and they're basically saying, though, in the end it didn't really work, is so they don't think north korea is as far along in their nuclear program as certainly north korea hopes. nonetheless, we think the president will mention it, not dwell on it tonight. instead, he wants to talk about the economy and jobs according to top aides.

the municipal bonds at 28%, tax- exempt bonds, i am curious as to whether you are going to continue that policy. on the ford investment on real estate act, whether you're saying -- on the foreign investment of real estate act, whether you're saying that treasury department will take action. >> the administration's proposal which would have limited the value of deductions in the top tax brackets to 28% was trying to restore some equity in the tax code and generate revenue we need for meeting our fiscal targets. it was not specifically directed at municipal bonds and other specific areas of tax activity. it was also meant to be a placeholder. we really should have tax reform and make specific policies deciding what is in or out and what the proper tax rates are. we put it in as a fallback, saying that if tax reform does not happen, this would help us get to the revenue targets we need. i would be happy to follow up with you on these issues of the individual component parts of tax reform. the hard decisions in tax reform will, in many cases, put us in places where there are things that many of us

Excerpts 0 to 57 of about 58 results.


(Some duplicates have been removed)


Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)